grant

Ollie Wines what a gun!! Wait... This is a Toupas thread...awful just awful. The only hard nut we've drafted since 2006 is Viney and that was a father-son selection. It must have hurt the recruiters to be compelled to select Viney when some soft as butter typical MFC player could have been available at the selection.

No the AFL sacked him for being a blight on the game

Whole lot of sour grapes from those who can't accept they were wrong about Neeld. Get over it ladies

I got more than sympathy, the bloke bled red and blue. Brought up a supporter and did heaps of extra stuff around the club to motivate the youngsters like his boxing camp for Rookies. He was also arguably the teams most vocal onfield leader, frequently firing up the boys during a match. Leadership comes in many forms and Beamer definately had some leadership that was vitally missed.

He won B&F before getting squeezed out of Neeld star studded midfield. Couldnt find a spot for him. Neeldy still got some mates left who might give him a job...(words of a loser taking on the biggest job in football).

Demons coach Mark Neeld revealed his recruiting strategy in an interview with the Herald Sun. "I like Moneyball," he said. http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/melbourne-to-use-moneyball-approach-in-recruiting-cheaper-players-at-end-of-season/story-fndv7pj3-1226405962335

The Club Killer kept spending bank to bring in big forwards so we could shank the ball loooooong to. No sign of life in the mid field just VFL attempts & moneyball.

Bailey was told to tank and so he took a honest swipe at the club in defence of his record over a period of time. There is no defence for Neeld and no reason for him to have sour grapes. He had total control of the club and delivered performances that looked worse than those tanking days.

Denis Pagan put up with much worse than poor old Neeldy. DP was hired then 3 months in the salary cap scandal was found out which robbed the club of picks for multiple drafts. Followed by Carlton essentially declaring themselves bankrupt from bad deals led by John Elliot acting President. They were in so much trouble the players were told to buy there own footballs for training! Add the fact is was a old list with multiple veterans retiring, it was not exactly a side that was the youngest in the comp with the most first round draft picks of any team like Neeldy inherited.

He was told he has the confidence of the board, you know the same board that has been and is currenly being dismantled.

And what can you say about Collingwood without Malthouse? For all those Neeld supporters out there, if you believe so much in what he is teaching then tell me what is a gameplan? Other than getting thrashed I see a confused team out there. Garland playing on during the kick in to book the ball 50 metres to not a single Melb player anywhere nearby on the wing just to clear the defensive 50 as much as possible before it gets rammed back in tells the story what faith the players have in this system.

Your comments are so delusional, people like you shouldnt be allowed opinion, to vote or procreate.

Starting point is when we lost by 186 to the team of the century on their home ground at the height of their dominance. Melb members loosing their [censored] and blissfully forgetting handing Paul Roos his greatest defeat as coach and forcing draws with Collingwood. The board lacking the competence to tell the coach to tweak the gameplan for more of a defence mindset as such loses are unacceptable, instead opting to sack. Bringing in a reject that I wouldn't be happy coaching an under 12s side was the final nail

Whatever gameplan we have, it's near impossible to execute when the midfield gets smashed like they did last night. I mean bloody hell, Mitch Clark spent time in the midfield, with Jamar doing the ruckwork. A ruckman tapping to a ruckman wont get the job done. Mark Neeld has a lot to answer for why he hasnt tried to poach any high profile mids.In his post match presser Neeld said the midfield is in the development phaise. Aside from Clark who we needed in the forward line, Dawes and Hogan were a mistake. What we really needed was Boak and O'Meara.

That article sums it up for me. The last 2 years of Bailey I actually enjoyed going to footy most of the time. Even though we were nowhere near the most skilled side going around, we were definately one of the most exciting. Since Neeld took over I've watched the side go backwards each week, there is no enjoyment or hope left.

Fact is we just experienced the worst season maybe ever in the history of the club. 1 win against a non-expansion club is an utter risgrace that only one-eyed Melbourne supporters could sugar coat or see any positives. Neeld can talk the talk all he likes but another season like last and he will struggle to find a job as a VFL coach.

AFL needs to reduce the minimum player payments from 90% of salary cap to at least 75% to allow struggling clubs more bargaining power in free agencies. It is pathetic to think that players like Cam Bruce, Green, Davey, Moloney etc (no disrespect intended) have been paid the same or more than the likes of Bartell, Scarlett, Selwood etc. But the fat controller doesnt have a clue so gap will keep getting bigger.

Richmond didn't think so but a good coach and gameplan turned a limited player like Morton into a contributor on Grand Final day. The MFC preach that we need more experience and leadership but then they let Rivers and Moloney walk in FA without a fight. Neeld says he wants tough players to execute his gameplan but then turns our best inside mid (Moloney) into a fringe player struggling to get a game. I have no doubt if Moloney goes to either Swans or Hawks he would be a very valuable player. It's much easier to de-list then it is to develop Neeldy. Were repeating the same sins as during the Bailey era by letting our veterans go. The difference is Neeld uses the mantra "we need more games experience into our list" as apposed to the old "being competitive" dribble.

Neeld is a dud coach. This teams has gone miles backwards and the fall out is about to begin. I'm concerned whether this club will survive his tenure. Those who think Neeld was exposed to a winning culture in Collingwood are delusional. I highly doubt Malthouse with his controlling nature would reveal much to Neeld especially in the presence of Buckley. Face the facts, Sanderson or Malthouse were the right men for the job. What we got is a talk first, tourette's

Watts is 21 and will improve under Neeld. NicNat came into the AFL ready-made and so there is no comparison at this stage. I still believe will become an elite player, not a dominant forward, but more in the mold of Goddard. I would select him ahead of NicNat who is will be an elite ruckman for the next decade, but you dont waste top picks on ruckmen. They can be easily acquired by trade or discovered late in the draft. If it was draft day 2008 and I was calling the shots it would be between Watts, Hurley & Rich, with Hurley taking the cake (just).

I agree we are carrying some deadwood. It puzzles me why Bartram is getting a game let alone in the leadership group. Although Garland isnt at his best this year he is still better than most. I wont accept Frawley is a shadow of his former self. He is having an outstanding year and if he was in a top 4 side the AFL world would be singing his praises. In loosing performances he shut down Kennedy (fresh off a 5 something goal performance) and Reiwold the following week. Make no mistake he is elite and unappreciated. Our true backline should be: Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Davis, Tapscott + fringe player Forwards should be: Watts, Jurrah, Clark, Howe, Petterd, Slyvia We havent seen this combo due injury etc, but I have no doubt it is a group with immense talent that can comp against anyone. As for the rest of the side, we're loosing bc we carry the deadwood of Bartram, Bate, SELLAR, Morton. These guys gets games for some unknown reason. You could throw Green, Davey & Rivers into that side but I know why they're given a game. Keepers in the midfield: Jones, Trenners, Moloney, McKenzie

I agree no gameplan can be implemented when your midfield can't find enough of the footy, which goes to show we need to draft some serious midfields studs and quick. As for the backline and forward line, they are both young and better than most top 8 sides in the comp. Therefore we need to address a single need (THE MIDFIELD) which should make drafting a simpler task. Other than Hawks and Pies I wouldnt trade our forward and backline for any other teams in the comp, when considering age, talent and future prospects. For this reason I'm optimistic. Give it time. If we can develop an elite midfield I have no doubt we can surpise the comp and win a flag out of nowhere. No other holes remain.

The I dont agree with your argument. What you're forgetting is that it takes time (5-10 games) for the opposition to figure out a players strengths and weakness through a scouting report and then reduce their effect during games. For this reason, many players impress early only to be found out as a one-trick pony.

Watched the game a second time and it is very disturbing the constant long kicking to a contest when numerous times there were uncontested Melbourne players available in the corridor. Surely this is not the gameplan...and kicking long to a contest is available every time as a last resort I hope. Otherwise, Trenners/Watts/Howe/Jamar had very good halves that were overshadowed by the entire teams poor second half. I think we're definately better than this but the gameplan (or how it was executed) really left us with little chance of winning. We will improve if a logical game plan is executed.

Mikes top 50 list is a joke. Placing Martin (25th) ahead of Nat Fyfe (40th) is a disgrace. If Fyfe played for Collingwood or Carlton I reckon he would have cracked top 15 and possibly even top 10 that Mike Sheehan is so delusional. This is a top 50 list of most hyped Vics, peppered with the occasional interstate superstar.